4me vs Espressive Barista comparison

4me and Espressive are both solutions in the IT Service Management (ITSM) category. 4me is ranked #17 with an average rating of 8.0, while Espressive is ranked #14 with an average rating of 9.3. 4me holds a 1.3% mindshare in ISM, compared to Espressive’s 0.3% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of 4me users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 87% of Espressive users who would recommend it.

4me

Read 4 4me reviews

426 Views
242 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Espressive Barista

Read 9 Espressive Barista reviews

168 Views
58 Comparison Views

87% willing to recommend

4me

Espressive Barista

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 3, 2024

4me and Espressive Barista are products in IT service management and automated support. 4me holds an advantage in pricing and support, while Espressive Barista leverages superior features, driving its appeal.

Features: 4me offers seamless integration, comprehensive service management, and robust traditional management tools that enhance efficiency. Espressive Barista differentiates itself with an AI-driven conversational interface, quick response to inquiries, and innovative AI features, which provide it a technological edge.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: 4me ensures a smooth transition with straightforward deployment and strong customer service. Espressive Barista uses a cloud-based deployment model for rapid implementation, potentially requiring more initial setup but promises greater long-term benefits through a proactive service approach.

Pricing and ROI: 4me offers competitive setup costs, with ROI evident through improved internal efficiencies and cost savings. Espressive Barista might entail higher upfront investment; however, its advanced functionalities are considered valuable, leading to significant ROI by automating processes and enhancing user interactions.

To learn more, read our detailed 4me vs. Espressive Barista Report (Updated: April 2025).

Buyer's Guide

4me vs. Espressive Barista

April 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 848,207 peers since 2012

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Categories and Ranking

4me

Ranking in IT Service Management (ITSM)

17th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

8.5

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Espressive Barista

Ranking in IT Service Management (ITSM)

14th

Average Rating

8.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Help Desk Software (15th), AI-Powered Chatbots (3rd)

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the IT Service Management (ITSM) category, the mindshare of 4me is 1.3%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Espressive Barista is 0.3%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

IT Service Management (ITSM)

Featured Reviews

Anneri Van Der Merwe

4me Product Manager at Blue Turtle Technologies

Impressive scalability and reliability for seamless service management

One area where I believe there's room for improvement in the 4me system is the absence of an asset discovery tool. While it does offer integration options with external tools for this purpose, it would be highly advantageous if it either developed its own asset discovery tool or incorporated an existing one directly into the platform.

Read full review

Jim Lobao

Senior Manager for End User Support Services at Five9

Has helped enhance our support ability, reduced our resolution time, and reduced our service desk costs

Espressive Barista's natural language processing and conventional AI still have room for improvement. We haven't yet found anything that resembles true AI that can learn autonomously without human intervention. However, Barista does help us identify and address some of these areas, allowing my team to step in and create intents and responses to questions. When a user asks a question that Barista doesn't immediately understand, we can recognize the pattern, capture it, and link it to a common intent. This is highly beneficial for acquiring such data, but it's a reactive approach and still requires curation. Natural language processing still has some way to go. One of our challenges is that our internal employees haven't yet adopted a natural way of interacting with Barista. Getting people to be concise and to the point, rather than being verbose as if they were interacting with a human, has been an ongoing challenge. While they may feel comfortable being conversational in Slack, expecting a human-like response, Barista is a different entity. Barista isn't interested in their recent vacation; it just wants to know they're locked out of their account. So, some users may assume Barista understands their intent when they say, "I'm back from vacation and locked out of my account." Barista, however, may interpret this as a request for the holiday schedule. Therefore, we're gradually educating our users to adapt their communication style for better success with Barista. Conversely, we desire Barista to adapt its behavior based on the interaction, the language used, and the way people communicate. I wholeheartedly desire an AI that can continuously learn and adapt to our organization's evolving needs. This is the most challenging aspect, as it involves understanding our organization's terminology, procedures, and toolsets. We've made significant progress in this area. However, from an NLP standpoint, we still face challenges with our nearly 3,000 Slack channel users, each with their unique communication styles. People ask questions in various ways, and sometimes there are misunderstandings. They want to interact with us naturally. However, we still struggle with natural language processing. People don't always realize that the bot is a virtual agent designed to be concise and efficient. Sometimes, less is more. It's been a difficult transition for people to grasp that they're conversing with a virtual agent, not a human. They still expect human-like interactions, such as discussing their weekend or holidays or simply pasting screenshots of errors. However, the bot can't interpret screenshots. If they provide the error code and some context about the application, the bot can better understand the issue. So, the key challenge is bridging the gap between human expectations and the bot's capabilities in terms of natural interaction.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros

"The solution is highly stable."

"I like their request management as well as their project management."

"It offers a comprehensive set of features without requiring additional payments for each feature."

"The multi-tenancy architecture, both in terms of functionality and reporting, is the best feature. It is a really well-thought, designed, and developed part of this product."

"The most valuable feature is its scalability."

"When it comes to neutral language processing and conversational AI, it's very good, very solid... We all have different ways of speaking or writing in English and the application does a very solid job of recognizing what's being asked regardless of how it's being asked."

"The solution is available to support us instantly as required."

"I like Expressive Barista's integration with Microsoft Teams."

"With respect to its natural language processing capabilities, it recognizes things that you wouldn't think it would recognize. Even in cases where it doesn't, it's pretty easy to go in and make the adjustments that are needed."

"The bot is pretty easy to update and keep up to date. Espressive itself is pretty easy to work with."

"Our developers have used the Barista Control Center to extend the platform by adding content, and they've found it fairly easy to do and manage"

"Its ability to recognize phrases has gotten smarter over time."

More Espressive Barista pros

Cons

"Asset Discovery is a feature that should be added."

"One area where I believe there's room for improvement in the 4me system is the absence of an asset discovery tool."

"We would like to be able to customize and brand the solution, or at least the majority of its features and dashboards, particularly those that will be used by a large number of people."

"We're still biased towards our previous, more mature product. 4me still needs to reach that level of maturity."

"Espressive Barista's natural language processing and conventional AI still have room for improvement."

"My only comment would be if they wanted to use this as an IT service management tool, maybe they could think about Barista making tickets and having change management and problem management capabilities."

"Expressive Barista could improve by adding native integration with WhatsApp, one of the top communication channels in South Africa. When we're trying to sell Barista to customers, we have to tell them that the solution doesn't have out-of-the-box support for WhatsApp. We can develop it, but then we need to have a conversation about how much that will cost."

"The knowledge management could definitely be improved."

"I would like to see the continued expansion of all of the automation capabilities."

"What would make things easier is more detail, out of the box, about what is helping out of the box. We're struggling a little bit to get that data. We want more information about what Barista has brought in that the employees are using, out of the box. We want more visibility into the things that we ourselves haven't done the interaction for."

"Although they've done some work on their metrics dashboard, there is some fine-tuning to do for people that just want to go in there at a glance and see their metrics."

"The reports provided by the solution are not customizable."

More Espressive Barista cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is expensive."

"The licensing costs on the website are about $60 for pay-as-you-go. And then it decreases based on volume discounts or something."

"This pricing falls on the lower end of the spectrum, making it a cost-effective option."

"It is the most affordable because it is priced per month per user."

"User-based licensing has been working well for us, and we believe we are deriving significant value from it."

"The pricing isn't overly burdensome. It's going to be interesting to see how new models come in with new capabilities but, as it is, as a base system, it's pretty good."

"The price for the licensing is fair."

"It is expensive. It's not a cheap thing."

"The solution is affordable."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which IT Service Management (ITSM) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

848,207 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

26%

Healthcare Company

Energy/Utilities Company

Government

Computer Software Company

51%

Manufacturing Company

Healthcare Company

Retailer

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about 4me?

The multi-tenancy architecture, both in terms of functionality and reporting, is the best feature. It is a really well-thought, designed, and developed part of this product.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for 4me?

The pricing is expensive. I rate it an eight out of ten.

See all answers

What needs improvement with 4me?

Asset Discovery is a feature that should be added.

See all answers

What do you like most about Espressive?

The most valuable feature is its scalability.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Espressive?

Espressive has been very accommodating in trying to meet our needs and adapt to our current situation. User-based licensing has been working well for us, and we believe we are deriving significant ...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Espressive?

See all answers

Comparisons

ServiceNow vs 4me

Compared 100% of the time

More 4me Competitors

ServiceNow Virtual Agent vs Espressive Barista

Compared 65% of the time

Moveworks vs Espressive Barista

Compared 24% of the time

ServiceNow vs Espressive Barista

Compared 11% of the time

More Espressive Barista Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

IT Service Management (ITSM)

March 2025

Download 4me product report

Buyer's Guide

Espressive Barista

April 2025

Download Espressive Barista product report

Overview

4me is the first enterprise service management application specifically built to support the Service Integration and Management (SIAM) approach. It allows the internal and external service providers of an enterprise to collaborate while 4me keeps track of the service levels. 4me also offers, by far, the fastest global response times and the most user-friendly interface.

4me

Barista, Espressive’s innovative virtual support agent (VSA) platform, takes on the role of the service agent, bringing the best of human experience with the best of artificial intelligence. Leveraging a proprietary and domain-specific large language model (LLM), the Employee Language Cloud, as well as integration with generalized LLMs, Barista automates resolution of employee questions, issues, and requests with personalized experiences that result in employee adoption of 80 to 85% and reduced help desk call volume of 50% to 70%.

Espressive

Buyer's Guide

4me vs. Espressive Barista

April 2025

Free Report: 4me vs. Espressive Barista

Find out what your peers are saying about 4me vs. Espressive Barista and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

848,207 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our 4me vs. Espressive Barista report.

See our list of best IT Service Management (ITSM) vendors.

We monitor all IT Service Management (ITSM) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.